I. Personal Jurisdiction
i. Personal/Territorial Jurisdiction
a. Defined
1. One Issue: In what state can the plaintiff sue the defendant
b. Question – Question is whether the governmental authority has the power to adjudicate the matter
1. Whether court has jurisdiction
A. Over the person (in personam) or
i. In personam – from Latin for “directed toward a particular person.” In a lawsuit in which the case is against a specific individual, that person must be served with a summons and complaint to give the court jurisdiction to try the case, and the judgment applies to that person and is called an “in personam judgment.” In personam is distinguished from in rem, which applies to property or “all the world” instead of a specific person. This technical distinction is important to determine where to file a lawsuit and how to serve a defendant. In personam means that a judgment can be enforceable against the person wherever he/she is. On the other hand, if the lawsuit is to determine title to property (in rem) then the action must be filed where the property exists and is only enforceable there.
B. The person’s property (in rem)
i. In rem – is a legal term describing the power a court may exercise over property (either real or personal) or a “status” against a person over whom the court does not have “in personam jurisdiction”. Jurisdiction in rem assumes the property or status is the primary object of the action, rather than personal liabilities not necessarily associated with the property (quasi in rem jurisdiction). Within the US federal court system, jurisdiction in rem typically refers to the power a federal court may exercise over large items of moveable property located within the court’s territory.
C. Also quasi in rem
i. is a legal term referring to a legal action based on property rights of a person absent from the jurisdiction. A quasi in rem action is commonly used when jurisdiction over the defendant is unobtainable due to his/her absence from the state. Any judgment will affect only the property seized, as in personam jurisdiction is unobtainable. Of note, in a quasi in rem case the court may lack personal jurisdiction over the defendant, but it
state or federal) cannot command anyone to do anything and cannot decide the merits of the dispute unless it has some basis of authority over that person.” The court must have “power” over the litigants.
v. Due Process/Fairness
a. Due Process clause requires that a D be sued in an appropriate forum;
b. DP places the limits on a court’s ability to impose binding judgments on litigants
vi. A defendant can relinquish this constitutional protection, by choice or by not raising an appropriate objection.
a. Same due process standards in federal and state court; same analysis
b. Court will always have power over a P.
1. Why?
A. P chose the forum; voluntarily submitted to the court’s jurisdiction
2. Question is whether the court has jurisdiction over the D
Can have power over a person and/or his property
